If it is an unlocked phone it should work on any GSM provider. You just plop your SIM card in it and it goes happily on its way.
Locking a phone means the practice of forcing the phone to only recognizing SIM cards from a single manufacturer. Unlocked phones don't worry about it.
Since this is a quad-band phone it is perfect for AT&T/Cingular. That 4th band is the 850MHz band that AT&T/Cingular recently moved many of their old 800MHz analog towers to (though naturally not the single cell tower in my little town). If you buy an unlocked quadband and put in your AT&T/Cingular SIM you should have the best coverage of any combination since they have roaming agreements with most GSM providers on the 900/1800/1900MHz bands BUT the other providers usually -don't- have access to AT&T/Cingular's 850MHz band even if you have a quadband phone since that other provider won't have any 850MHz towers of their own.
It definitely makes AT&T/Cingular an attractive package, even if they historically have had the worst deals overall, since you can get much better coverage with that combination.
Some providers (T-Mobile -used- to but I don't know if they will anymore) will unlock your phone after a certain amount of time with their service, so you may find that a more economical route as buying a phone in the unlocked state can get expensive.
I'm not particularly concerned with it being -this- PocketPC. I'm more wondering if there is -any- PDA phone that will run Linux and still be able to use the phone features.
So look, I am not dis'ing on Windows, I just want to kill those replies now.
But... some of us professionally can't afford to be seen running Microsoft products if there is any alternative.
So... is there a Linux-based PDA phone (running Opie on a PocketPC phone is fine, or GPE)? And if so, will Skype or SJPhone or something similar work on it?
I know that Opie will run on most PocketPCs, but can they be installed on the combi-phones -and- use the phone features?
If so, they've got my money... if not I'll be sticking with my current setup for awhile longer.
Or to restate some of your other responses in historical and sociological perspective...
How do you think the U.S. population would have reacted if J.P. Morgan or Rockefeller had proposed Social Security instead of it being part of FDR's New Deal?
Or in more modern context, if Halliburton were put in charge of rebuilding Iraq (ok, so maybe that is a bad example).
How would you react if you found out your local government was considering outsourcing the collating of your police department, school and tax records to a 3rd party private business?
The point being that no matter the lofty intentions, some things simply don't belong in the hands of an entity who's basic reason for existence is to turn a profit as aggressively as they are able.
If any other company besides Microsoft had tried something like Passport's original goals (different from the Liberty project since that began as open standards with a committee of different organizations) I think we would have all been just as upset. Well, only if that company had had the possibility of pulling it off. Face it... Microsoft was and is a legal monopoly in the desktop/personal user market and so they were the only private company who could have pulled that off if they hadn't faced opposition. Anyone else would have simply been ignored. If the opponent is too large to ignore, you have to raise a ruckus.
The idea of I-Names run by an open group with policy and procedural transparency is -very- different. I would expect that if they didn't maintain transparency people will end up opposing it just like they did Microsoft.
And a properly built system (one where you can't use your generic password to access/alter the main system with private information and where the main system is properly encrypted and secured) doesn't necessarily mean that someone who snags your password can get all of your info. It will always be up to the user to be judicious in the data they store. For instance, don't put your credit card info in the main system nor allow the client authentication sites to store it in a way that it can be used without your re-entering it.
I don't consider I-Names to be something I want to store every last bit of info about myself in.
It wouldn't be the first time and I don't think it is a decision based on the economies of the 2 regions (as in one country not being able to afford as many games). I do think that you are close in that this is likely a socio-economic decions (as in the social norms of each country determining which policy is more economically sound).
In Japan people are more social players... in other words, it isn't going to look "weird" to see a number of young adults playing together on DS systems in a public gathering place. Therefore the inclusion of a mode where you only need 1 cartridge to play will drive sales of the base unit.
In the U.S. we have far less focus on social gaming and are willing toi pay out the nose for games... therefore there is little if any advantage to "giving away" the multi-player game since someone who wants to play a GBDS game will likely already have a GBDS. In other words, the impetus to buy the system in Japan is driven by a social desire while in the U.S. it appears to be a more -antisocial- behaviour since we in the U.S. often use such devices to exclude ourselves and "create space". I know I use it that way on a plane as do many others (though if I could wirelessly game on a plane with the kid a few rows up without us both having to own the cart, I would be quite likely too... I think the U.S. antisocial playing style is often because vendors assume we aren't social players).
Note that I am not saying -no one- plays multiplayer games... my wife and I have GBAs to play multiplayer and having to buy 2 games usually keeps us from doing so. That's a lot of dough in the end when we could just buy 2 different carts and swap them.
And for those U.S. players who say "hey! I play socially" / "I wish I could play socially, it's not my fault"... I agree with you... but looking at the styles of multiplayer gaming here compared to Asia it doesn't change the fact that it is less of a culture here.
However, as others mentioned there is apparently a missing game -mode- in the U.S. version... if this were true I would think that to be a bad decision since the U.S. version is obviously willing to pay a premium to get multiplayer.
I am making a guess here... purely a guess... but is it possible that the ratio of the price of the console to the price of game carts is higher in Japan than the U.S.? I am talking about the ratio of console:carts not the direct price of the console in Yen to the price of the console in U.$. If not, then I assume that the Japanese market must by a lot more games in total than the U.S. market does (# of carts, not cost of carts).
Well, to be fair CBS does the same trick in a different manner.
Instead of -announcing- the differing schedule, CBS simply starts CSI 1 minute early (and therefore Survivor ends 1 minute earlier than announced).
In the case of a show like CSI, CBS is shooting themselves in the foot by not at least making their start time accurate, as often missing the first minute of that show can leave one confused for the remaining 59 minutes:)
Our solution is simple, we watch Survivor anyway, but yeesh.
As for ER a minute early, that is why my wife and I agreed to kill the season pass for it since we like CSI better.
And yes, TiVo can work to bandage the situation and probably are, but the fault of this lies with the networks. Manual recording times can help but are a pain in the butt. 9:00 means 9:00, not 8:59 in spirit or in the guide. And the networks, not TiVo, are responsible for feeding the data to the guide services.
I had a similar problem on a Toshiba Tecra S1 that I was installing SuSE Linux Desktop 1.0 (kernel 2.4 / SuSE 8.1 base) for a friend.
I installed it, it worked fine, I rebooted, it refused to get past the initial BIOS screen. No warnings, nothing. Needless to say my friend who was using Windows with no problem on this machine was a little concerned and I was feeling -stupid-.
After a few tries I called their tech support... I knew I would have to wait through the various standard procedures before I got accelerated. Got accelerated and still no real help. While on hold I removed the battery and let it sit without power for a minute, then put the battery in and it rebooted.
Powered down again and wham, same problem.
Some bug in the SuSE patched 2.4 kernel (red hat and other kernels from the same generation worked fine), I am assuming an ACPI patch, were the problem but the real problem was apparently something in the S1 BIOS. A couple months later a new BIOS fixed the problem as reported on a few forums but my friend didn't want to bother again (note: this wasn't an install linux crusade from me, he was just curious).
Fact of the matter is ACPI is still one of the least well standardized parts of the modern laptop, both from a BIOS as well as from an OS perpsective.
A) As you mentioned I had already hit spoilage at that point and so it was too much even at that point.
B) Ever read/. while on the phone or doing something else? As I mentioned in my post, I didn't realize what I was reading until it was read which is why SPOILER warnings are key for items such as this. I multitask well but that doesn't mean it has all hit a conscious layer in a timely manner.
Yes, but as I pointed out (at least by example anyway), I -knew- he lost on this episode... in fact I knew for weeks. But I didn't want to know that the 3rd person got dropped nor did I want to know anything about the final question. Re-read my message... I accept that I may know an ending ahead of time, it is people blurting out the steps to that end that deflates the fun.
Re:Geez, how about a Spoiler Warning?
on
Adieu to Ken Jennings
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Maybe... but speaking for someone in Mtn time with a TiVo I agree with your post's parent.
Look, I knew he was going away this week sometime, so I set up a few manual recordings even though I almost never watch the show. Just because I knew it was going to end didn't mean I wanted to know all the details.
Ever know anyone who recorded a football game but heard in the news that their team lost but planned to watch anyway? Now, what was their reaction if you told them not only that the team lost, but by how much and about the final play?
All it would have taken would have been 2 things:
1) a spoiler warning
2) enough text that the details wouldn't have been posted until the reader clicked on the full story.
It is kind of like someone telling you "Doc Ock... and is,,, when... explodes at the end of Spiderman 2" (fill in "..." with what happened at the end) before you go see it. Did you knew Spidey was going to win ahead of time? SURE. Did you want to know how? No.
This isn't in the same class as the 2 examples, but common courtesy when posting folks. I was almost all the way through the post before my brain clicked and said "ummm, maybe I don't want to know this yet".
Very true, but materials are continuously being created that are stronger and lighter than ever before. I would be surprised if it weren't =possible= with today's materials and enough engeineering resources, but it doesn't seem like it is all that useful except to prove that DaVinci was the genius we already know him to be.
Unless they think this can be made practical for use beyond this one test it sounds like a waste of time and money to me. YES I will think it is cool, but not nearly as useful as, say, cheap and renewable means to space.
It is the trend of computing in general right now to go with dual-core.
Sun (UltraSPARC), AMD (Athlon64/Opteron) and Intel (not sure which one they are planning on... guess where I work *lol*) are all planning on multi-core CPUs within the next year or two.
Not just dual core CPUs (that will be the first round) but 4-way and maybe later 8-way CPUs. At the same time the CPUs will become marginally faster... but not too much. It is the speed blocks they are hitting that is causing this.
And that doesn't count SMP machines or Hyperthreading. All of these groups are talking about 2, 4, 8 and more-way machines. Imagine an 8-way 8-core CPU machine... literally 64 CPUs (64 CPUs has been possible for a long time but not in such a compact form... and imaging a 64-way 8-core machine... maybe 5 years but still... that's a lot of CPU). I've seen slides from all 3 talking about this basic direction.
I think you'll see that dual-core GPU in an SLI configuration soon, probably around the time you see a dual-core dual-CPU (64bit of course).
My opinion is that 3D gaming is KeWl but -good- games need logic and heart, not more polygons. I would really like to see developers take more of their resources and place them into those areas... we've got enough horsepower today to last me for a long time:)
Not sure about the identical bit. In theory you're supposed to be able to use an Nvidia 6600 PCI-E from brand A with one from brand B, but we all know how that can go.
If you mean can use plop a 6600 in with a 6800 or a future card, I don't believe so (maybe... doubt it though since then you'd have to compensate for one card being better than the other).
As for the option to upgrade, yes, if you already have a PCI-E capable machine. If I remember correctly it took about 2 years for AGP to become the defacto standard (as in Best Buy can assume if you are buying a video card, they can assume safely that it is AGP in almost every case). My point simply being that very many people do not have the ability to run these SLI cards. It is those people (me:) that I was pointing out will probably just find it cheaper to wait until there is a faster card and upgrade it.
In my case for instance I have a dual Opteron 246 box with AGP. That is going to be plenty fast for me for a long time (I was using a P4 2.4 laptop for gaming happily until this season's games came out). I am willing to bet that my CPU capacity will be within the minimum recommended specs for games for 3 years or more (and after that who knows, maybe I won't want to game as much or maybe I'll buy a gaming system). My video card, however, will likely only do for 18-24 months. It will be much easier for me to go from my 6800-GT to a next-gen card than to upgrade to a PCI-E system so that I can use SLI.
Not to mention the fact that cards and games tend to move to new APIs every year or two. What happens if a new API becomes the power-gaming standard and you are now stuck with either buying a second SLI card with the old standard (consider that -2- GeForce 5200's have less power than 1 6800 Ultra on DirectX 9 benchmarks) or upgrading to a new card anyway.
For people who have a PCI-E system, assuming the next gen cards and games don't move to DirectX11 / OpenGL3, upgrading by adding a second card is great... that's alot of "if"ing though.
So my opinion (and that's all any of this is) is that if you want SLI and have the money to spend, get it now. If not, AGP cards will likely be produced for a few more years and so wait until you need to upgrade your entire system and -then- if you have the money for SLI buy it all at once. I understand the incremental upgrade, but having tried it in the past (do I buy a faster 486 or do I upgrade to a Pentium? Do I buy my 2nd Voodoo card or do I go ahead and get that cool-fast ATI card that requires me to get an AGP mobo? etc) I just don't see it being as truly practical as it seems in theory.
Not completely certain, but yes I do believe you're correct about the horizontal-ness of CRTs.
Even with LCDs, most drivers if not all -expect- the data to flow that way.
I think I see where you are going... an advantage of L->R (or R->L) would be the ability to split the screen into stereo images. There have actually been APIs and I think even hardware specific pieces (I remember glasses that did this, but you of course had to have the software split the image to the lenses) that did this, so it really wouldn't address much. Especially with the ability to do multiple monitors, since you can now render to individual monitors instead of splitting up a single.
Then again, I'm way out of my field at this point:)
Ummm... there are MUCH MUCH MUCH cheaper ways to get 2 or more monitors.
Video and Photo editing don't -touch- hardware 3D acceleration functions, which means that you are a couple of hundred w of electricity and a few hundred $ of hard earned cash if you were to use SLI for that.
Nvidia even recognizes this by their NVS280 card... essentially a 6x00 series card that will drive dual monitors but with none of the 3D acceleration tech. A current generation Nvidia dual-DVI card for $160 without the need for external power.
I'm quite sure (can't say why, unless they've released it) that there will be a PCI-E NVS280 which means you can add multiple dual-DVI cards for much less than dual-DVI 6x00 cards.
And ya know... between virtual desktops and a KVM, I've been -fairly- happy with my monitor for a couple of years now. I am anxiously waiting to be able to afford a 24" widescreen LCD but until I can I'll stick with what I have. The cost of a 4 screen system with even mid-range (say 25ms 17") LCDs (unless you want to have 300lbs of monitor on your desk) is going to cost a ton.
I guess if you have the money to waste on multiple top of the line 3D cards and the electricity over their lifetime, you might have the money to spend on those LCDs... in which case lucky you... but I don't think most people miss your point so much as have other things to pay for first.
First it is mildly interesting to note that SLI from Voodoo was "scan-line interleaving", as in every other line was alternated between the 2 cards. Nvidia SLI is "scalable link interface" and instead renders the top half of the image on one and the bottom on the other.
It does make me wonder if the technology is capable of truly scaling... ie... more than 2 cards? Could be useful for scientific simulations or even getting closer to the idea of "ToyStory in realtime" (and no arguments here... using the same shaders as Pixar used in the movies in realtime is not feasible today... cheap tricks to get close, maybe).
However, given the cost, and looking at what the 6800 can handle by itself, and comparing -those- to the evolution of games it appears to me that it will be no more costly to simply upgrade to a 6900/7000/whatever when it is required, as I can easily get by for the next year or two on a 6800 Ultra especially if including the fact that I would need a new computer to run it on since I don't have PCI-E (though I do have PCI-X, but not for gaming needs). And will be saving on electricity and mean time to failure (though that doesn't seem to be an issue much with video cards).
Not saying I don't see the attraction, but I don't get anywhere NEAR interested in 3D gaming enough to be spending that kind of dough.
I think the point to the parent to your post was that the great-grandparent pre-supposed that we were operating under the premise of "how most people understand open source".
The problem isn't with your idea, only that the originator nixed it for consideration within this thread.
But to verify it was -your- printer they have to figure out it was you first (or at least have enough suspicion to think of you). Far different from being able to look at the code and trace you down with it.
And heck, for the truly paranoid, you could go out to one of any number of government auctions held throughout the country and buy up all of the auctioned off daisywheels in cash, using them once and very doubtfully tracked.
Although this does lead to some interesting "joke" opportunities for all of those places I visit while working that have open-to-all network printers...
And for a last way around this, buy a laser printer from office depot... take out all the guts. Buy a second one at another office depot (always with cash), swap the guts, and return one of them. When they come looking for the printer registered to that code, they'll find some schmoe that bought your returned (or if you are lucky, refurb'ed from some other part of the country) printer with their plastic.
Or simply DON'T PRINT SOMETHING that requires the fuzz to come after you.
This is why I tend to get pissed at CSI:Miami. CSI:NY hasn't got enough track record yet for me to decide. CSI (original) is much more in touch with reality as far as technology goes. A few occasional trek-ish moments but nothing like CSI:Miami.
SO if you take your intelligence and create a new gene, are you God?
The point was that this -interferes- with natural evolution.
If an artificially introduced gene grows in the intended plant, then yes it is very much like Creation (though generally speaking most artificial genes are taken from existing genes that occur in other organisms).
If that gene then populates throughout an ecosystem, causing that population to push out the previous population that didn't have the new gene, then it shows survival of the fittest. While ther gene wasn't naturally created through mutation, all following aspects follow the laws of Evolution.
Your comparison actually illustrates quite well the reason I have a problem with this. Man is trying to play God without having the omniscience to know what the affects will be. Just like introducing Kudzu from Japan in the U.S. (or any other example of organisms into areas that they did not belong), only now we're not doing it with complete organisms, we are instead creating new ones.
I'm not positing the existence of God... my belief in that matter doesn't matter (and is too convoluted for this message:), I am worrying about -us- trying to behave like we are supreme beings.
It is this problem that will eventually cause the downfall of the GM licensing rules as they exist right now (note: I'm not saying it will kill GM as a method or product).
Take for instance recent studies that show that grain that was grown in the U.S. and exported to Mexico for -food- and not in the form of meant-for-planting-seeds has mixed in with the Mexican corn crops.
The Mexicans did not plant the GM seeds, they don't -want- GM seeds, but now they have them. By some interpretations of the current rules it means that the Mexican farmers (if they were in the states) would be unable to replant their existing crops nor sell the seeds elsewhere because they contain protected IP.
Ridiculous. Talk about viral licensing;)
The end result is that there is a law on it's way from Mexico stating that any corn imported from the U.S. has to be labelled GM (or GM free, which is rapidly becoming impossible) -and- milled before entry into Mexico. Even then Murphy states that some kernels will make it through the process whole and/or migrate naturally and the GM genes will continue to migrate.
Yep... this exactly what anti-GM folks have been saying for years... once a new gene gets into the wild and it provides benefits, it will naturally propogate. It is called Evolution (except in Kansas and Georgia... and I get to make that joke since I grew up in one and lived in the other for awhile) and we are most definitely tampering with it.
Slashdot Mirror
If it is an unlocked phone it should work on any GSM provider. You just plop your SIM card in it and it goes happily on its way.
Locking a phone means the practice of forcing the phone to only recognizing SIM cards from a single manufacturer. Unlocked phones don't worry about it.
Since this is a quad-band phone it is perfect for AT&T/Cingular. That 4th band is the 850MHz band that AT&T/Cingular recently moved many of their old 800MHz analog towers to (though naturally not the single cell tower in my little town). If you buy an unlocked quadband and put in your AT&T/Cingular SIM you should have the best coverage of any combination since they have roaming agreements with most GSM providers on the 900/1800/1900MHz bands BUT the other providers usually -don't- have access to AT&T/Cingular's 850MHz band even if you have a quadband phone since that other provider won't have any 850MHz towers of their own.
It definitely makes AT&T/Cingular an attractive package, even if they historically have had the worst deals overall, since you can get much better coverage with that combination.
Some providers (T-Mobile -used- to but I don't know if they will anymore) will unlock your phone after a certain amount of time with their service, so you may find that a more economical route as buying a phone in the unlocked state can get expensive.
I'm not particularly concerned with it being -this- PocketPC. I'm more wondering if there is -any- PDA phone that will run Linux and still be able to use the phone features.
So look, I am not dis'ing on Windows, I just want to kill those replies now.
... some of us professionally can't afford to be seen running Microsoft products if there is any alternative.
... is there a Linux-based PDA phone (running Opie on a PocketPC phone is fine, or GPE)? And if so, will Skype or SJPhone or something similar work on it?
... if not I'll be sticking with my current setup for awhile longer.
But
So
I know that Opie will run on most PocketPCs, but can they be installed on the combi-phones -and- use the phone features?
If so, they've got my money
Or to restate some of your other responses in historical and sociological perspective ...
... Microsoft was and is a legal monopoly in the desktop/personal user market and so they were the only private company who could have pulled that off if they hadn't faced opposition. Anyone else would have simply been ignored. If the opponent is too large to ignore, you have to raise a ruckus.
How do you think the U.S. population would have reacted if J.P. Morgan or Rockefeller had proposed Social Security instead of it being part of FDR's New Deal?
Or in more modern context, if Halliburton were put in charge of rebuilding Iraq (ok, so maybe that is a bad example).
How would you react if you found out your local government was considering outsourcing the collating of your police department, school and tax records to a 3rd party private business?
The point being that no matter the lofty intentions, some things simply don't belong in the hands of an entity who's basic reason for existence is to turn a profit as aggressively as they are able.
If any other company besides Microsoft had tried something like Passport's original goals (different from the Liberty project since that began as open standards with a committee of different organizations) I think we would have all been just as upset. Well, only if that company had had the possibility of pulling it off. Face it
The idea of I-Names run by an open group with policy and procedural transparency is -very- different. I would expect that if they didn't maintain transparency people will end up opposing it just like they did Microsoft.
And a properly built system (one where you can't use your generic password to access/alter the main system with private information and where the main system is properly encrypted and secured) doesn't necessarily mean that someone who snags your password can get all of your info. It will always be up to the user to be judicious in the data they store. For instance, don't put your credit card info in the main system nor allow the client authentication sites to store it in a way that it can be used without your re-entering it.
I don't consider I-Names to be something I want to store every last bit of info about myself in.
It wouldn't be the first time and I don't think it is a decision based on the economies of the 2 regions (as in one country not being able to afford as many games). I do think that you are close in that this is likely a socio-economic decions (as in the social norms of each country determining which policy is more economically sound).
... in other words, it isn't going to look "weird" to see a number of young adults playing together on DS systems in a public gathering place. Therefore the inclusion of a mode where you only need 1 cartridge to play will drive sales of the base unit.
... therefore there is little if any advantage to "giving away" the multi-player game since someone who wants to play a GBDS game will likely already have a GBDS. In other words, the impetus to buy the system in Japan is driven by a social desire while in the U.S. it appears to be a more -antisocial- behaviour since we in the U.S. often use such devices to exclude ourselves and "create space". I know I use it that way on a plane as do many others (though if I could wirelessly game on a plane with the kid a few rows up without us both having to own the cart, I would be quite likely too ... I think the U.S. antisocial playing style is often because vendors assume we aren't social players).
... my wife and I have GBAs to play multiplayer and having to buy 2 games usually keeps us from doing so. That's a lot of dough in the end when we could just buy 2 different carts and swap them.
... I agree with you ... but looking at the styles of multiplayer gaming here compared to Asia it doesn't change the fact that it is less of a culture here.
... if this were true I would think that to be a bad decision since the U.S. version is obviously willing to pay a premium to get multiplayer.
... purely a guess ... but is it possible that the ratio of the price of the console to the price of game carts is higher in Japan than the U.S.? I am talking about the ratio of console:carts not the direct price of the console in Yen to the price of the console in U.$. If not, then I assume that the Japanese market must by a lot more games in total than the U.S. market does (# of carts, not cost of carts).
In Japan people are more social players
In the U.S. we have far less focus on social gaming and are willing toi pay out the nose for games
Note that I am not saying -no one- plays multiplayer games
And for those U.S. players who say "hey! I play socially" / "I wish I could play socially, it's not my fault"
However, as others mentioned there is apparently a missing game -mode- in the U.S. version
I am making a guess here
Well, to be fair CBS does the same trick in a different manner.
:)
Instead of -announcing- the differing schedule, CBS simply starts CSI 1 minute early (and therefore Survivor ends 1 minute earlier than announced).
In the case of a show like CSI, CBS is shooting themselves in the foot by not at least making their start time accurate, as often missing the first minute of that show can leave one confused for the remaining 59 minutes
Our solution is simple, we watch Survivor anyway, but yeesh.
As for ER a minute early, that is why my wife and I agreed to kill the season pass for it since we like CSI better.
And yes, TiVo can work to bandage the situation and probably are, but the fault of this lies with the networks. Manual recording times can help but are a pain in the butt. 9:00 means 9:00, not 8:59 in spirit or in the guide. And the networks, not TiVo, are responsible for feeding the data to the guide services.
Well, at least it is good to know /. is finally clearing out the submissions pool.
I had a similar problem on a Toshiba Tecra S1 that I was installing SuSE Linux Desktop 1.0 (kernel 2.4 / SuSE 8.1 base) for a friend.
... I knew I would have to wait through the various standard procedures before I got accelerated. Got accelerated and still no real help. While on hold I removed the battery and let it sit without power for a minute, then put the battery in and it rebooted.
I installed it, it worked fine, I rebooted, it refused to get past the initial BIOS screen. No warnings, nothing. Needless to say my friend who was using Windows with no problem on this machine was a little concerned and I was feeling -stupid-.
After a few tries I called their tech support
Powered down again and wham, same problem.
Some bug in the SuSE patched 2.4 kernel (red hat and other kernels from the same generation worked fine), I am assuming an ACPI patch, were the problem but the real problem was apparently something in the S1 BIOS. A couple months later a new BIOS fixed the problem as reported on a few forums but my friend didn't want to bother again (note: this wasn't an install linux crusade from me, he was just curious).
Fact of the matter is ACPI is still one of the least well standardized parts of the modern laptop, both from a BIOS as well as from an OS perpsective.
A) As you mentioned I had already hit spoilage at that point and so it was too much even at that point.
/. while on the phone or doing something else? As I mentioned in my post, I didn't realize what I was reading until it was read which is why SPOILER warnings are key for items such as this. I multitask well but that doesn't mean it has all hit a conscious layer in a timely manner.
B) Ever read
Yes, but as I pointed out (at least by example anyway), I -knew- he lost on this episode ... in fact I knew for weeks. But I didn't want to know that the 3rd person got dropped nor did I want to know anything about the final question. Re-read my message ... I accept that I may know an ending ahead of time, it is people blurting out the steps to that end that deflates the fun.
Maybe ... but speaking for someone in Mtn time with a TiVo I agree with your post's parent.
... and is ,,, when ... explodes at the end of Spiderman 2" (fill in "..." with what happened at the end) before you go see it. Did you knew Spidey was going to win ahead of time? SURE. Did you want to know how? No.
Look, I knew he was going away this week sometime, so I set up a few manual recordings even though I almost never watch the show. Just because I knew it was going to end didn't mean I wanted to know all the details.
Ever know anyone who recorded a football game but heard in the news that their team lost but planned to watch anyway? Now, what was their reaction if you told them not only that the team lost, but by how much and about the final play?
All it would have taken would have been 2 things:
1) a spoiler warning
2) enough text that the details wouldn't have been posted until the reader clicked on the full story.
It is kind of like someone telling you "Doc Ock
This isn't in the same class as the 2 examples, but common courtesy when posting folks. I was almost all the way through the post before my brain clicked and said "ummm, maybe I don't want to know this yet".
The nipple isn't intuitive.
Sucking is instinctual.
It is being -rewarded- when you suck that causes you to begin to learn that you can get nourishment from it.
And strangely both of the preceeding sentences are ambiguous between babies+milk and software+users.
Very true, but materials are continuously being created that are stronger and lighter than ever before. I would be surprised if it weren't =possible= with today's materials and enough engeineering resources, but it doesn't seem like it is all that useful except to prove that DaVinci was the genius we already know him to be.
Unless they think this can be made practical for use beyond this one test it sounds like a waste of time and money to me. YES I will think it is cool, but not nearly as useful as, say, cheap and renewable means to space.
It is the trend of computing in general right now to go with dual-core.
... guess where I work *lol*) are all planning on multi-core CPUs within the next year or two.
... but not too much. It is the speed blocks they are hitting that is causing this.
... literally 64 CPUs (64 CPUs has been possible for a long time but not in such a compact form ... and imaging a 64-way 8-core machine ... maybe 5 years but still ... that's a lot of CPU). I've seen slides from all 3 talking about this basic direction.
... we've got enough horsepower today to last me for a long time :)
Sun (UltraSPARC), AMD (Athlon64/Opteron) and Intel (not sure which one they are planning on
Not just dual core CPUs (that will be the first round) but 4-way and maybe later 8-way CPUs. At the same time the CPUs will become marginally faster
And that doesn't count SMP machines or Hyperthreading. All of these groups are talking about 2, 4, 8 and more-way machines. Imagine an 8-way 8-core CPU machine
I think you'll see that dual-core GPU in an SLI configuration soon, probably around the time you see a dual-core dual-CPU (64bit of course).
My opinion is that 3D gaming is KeWl but -good- games need logic and heart, not more polygons. I would really like to see developers take more of their resources and place them into those areas
Not sure about the identical bit. In theory you're supposed to be able to use an Nvidia 6600 PCI-E from brand A with one from brand B, but we all know how that can go.
... doubt it though since then you'd have to compensate for one card being better than the other).
:) that I was pointing out will probably just find it cheaper to wait until there is a faster card and upgrade it.
... that's alot of "if"ing though.
If you mean can use plop a 6600 in with a 6800 or a future card, I don't believe so (maybe
As for the option to upgrade, yes, if you already have a PCI-E capable machine. If I remember correctly it took about 2 years for AGP to become the defacto standard (as in Best Buy can assume if you are buying a video card, they can assume safely that it is AGP in almost every case). My point simply being that very many people do not have the ability to run these SLI cards. It is those people (me
In my case for instance I have a dual Opteron 246 box with AGP. That is going to be plenty fast for me for a long time (I was using a P4 2.4 laptop for gaming happily until this season's games came out). I am willing to bet that my CPU capacity will be within the minimum recommended specs for games for 3 years or more (and after that who knows, maybe I won't want to game as much or maybe I'll buy a gaming system). My video card, however, will likely only do for 18-24 months. It will be much easier for me to go from my 6800-GT to a next-gen card than to upgrade to a PCI-E system so that I can use SLI.
Not to mention the fact that cards and games tend to move to new APIs every year or two. What happens if a new API becomes the power-gaming standard and you are now stuck with either buying a second SLI card with the old standard (consider that -2- GeForce 5200's have less power than 1 6800 Ultra on DirectX 9 benchmarks) or upgrading to a new card anyway.
For people who have a PCI-E system, assuming the next gen cards and games don't move to DirectX11 / OpenGL3, upgrading by adding a second card is great
So my opinion (and that's all any of this is) is that if you want SLI and have the money to spend, get it now. If not, AGP cards will likely be produced for a few more years and so wait until you need to upgrade your entire system and -then- if you have the money for SLI buy it all at once. I understand the incremental upgrade, but having tried it in the past (do I buy a faster 486 or do I upgrade to a Pentium? Do I buy my 2nd Voodoo card or do I go ahead and get that cool-fast ATI card that requires me to get an AGP mobo? etc) I just don't see it being as truly practical as it seems in theory.
Not completely certain, but yes I do believe you're correct about the horizontal-ness of CRTs.
... an advantage of L->R (or R->L) would be the ability to split the screen into stereo images. There have actually been APIs and I think even hardware specific pieces (I remember glasses that did this, but you of course had to have the software split the image to the lenses) that did this, so it really wouldn't address much. Especially with the ability to do multiple monitors, since you can now render to individual monitors instead of splitting up a single.
:)
Even with LCDs, most drivers if not all -expect- the data to flow that way.
I think I see where you are going
Then again, I'm way out of my field at this point
Ummm ... there are MUCH MUCH MUCH cheaper ways to get 2 or more monitors.
... essentially a 6x00 series card that will drive dual monitors but with none of the 3D acceleration tech. A current generation Nvidia dual-DVI card for $160 without the need for external power.
... between virtual desktops and a KVM, I've been -fairly- happy with my monitor for a couple of years now. I am anxiously waiting to be able to afford a 24" widescreen LCD but until I can I'll stick with what I have. The cost of a 4 screen system with even mid-range (say 25ms 17") LCDs (unless you want to have 300lbs of monitor on your desk) is going to cost a ton.
... in which case lucky you ... but I don't think most people miss your point so much as have other things to pay for first.
Video and Photo editing don't -touch- hardware 3D acceleration functions, which means that you are a couple of hundred w of electricity and a few hundred $ of hard earned cash if you were to use SLI for that.
Nvidia even recognizes this by their NVS280 card
I'm quite sure (can't say why, unless they've released it) that there will be a PCI-E NVS280 which means you can add multiple dual-DVI cards for much less than dual-DVI 6x00 cards.
And ya know
I guess if you have the money to waste on multiple top of the line 3D cards and the electricity over their lifetime, you might have the money to spend on those LCDs
First it is mildly interesting to note that SLI from Voodoo was "scan-line interleaving", as in every other line was alternated between the 2 cards. Nvidia SLI is "scalable link interface" and instead renders the top half of the image on one and the bottom on the other.
... ie ... more than 2 cards? Could be useful for scientific simulations or even getting closer to the idea of "ToyStory in realtime" (and no arguments here ... using the same shaders as Pixar used in the movies in realtime is not feasible today ... cheap tricks to get close, maybe).
It does make me wonder if the technology is capable of truly scaling
However, given the cost, and looking at what the 6800 can handle by itself, and comparing -those- to the evolution of games it appears to me that it will be no more costly to simply upgrade to a 6900/7000/whatever when it is required, as I can easily get by for the next year or two on a 6800 Ultra especially if including the fact that I would need a new computer to run it on since I don't have PCI-E (though I do have PCI-X, but not for gaming needs). And will be saving on electricity and mean time to failure (though that doesn't seem to be an issue much with video cards).
Not saying I don't see the attraction, but I don't get anywhere NEAR interested in 3D gaming enough to be spending that kind of dough.
I think the point to the parent to your post was that the great-grandparent pre-supposed that we were operating under the premise of "how most people understand open source".
The problem isn't with your idea, only that the originator nixed it for consideration within this thread.
But to verify it was -your- printer they have to figure out it was you first (or at least have enough suspicion to think of you). Far different from being able to look at the code and trace you down with it.
...
... take out all the guts. Buy a second one at another office depot (always with cash), swap the guts, and return one of them. When they come looking for the printer registered to that code, they'll find some schmoe that bought your returned (or if you are lucky, refurb'ed from some other part of the country) printer with their plastic.
And heck, for the truly paranoid, you could go out to one of any number of government auctions held throughout the country and buy up all of the auctioned off daisywheels in cash, using them once and very doubtfully tracked.
Although this does lead to some interesting "joke" opportunities for all of those places I visit while working that have open-to-all network printers
And for a last way around this, buy a laser printer from office depot
Or simply DON'T PRINT SOMETHING that requires the fuzz to come after you.
Which can still be tracked to your employer.
That's why I always use Kinko's, paying cash, while wearing a Santa suit (everyone loves Santa, doesn't matter what time of year).
The flourecent screw-ins were much more expensive when they first came out, too, but economics is a very useful law.
This is why I tend to get pissed at CSI:Miami. CSI:NY hasn't got enough track record yet for me to decide. CSI (original) is much more in touch with reality as far as technology goes. A few occasional trek-ish moments but nothing like CSI:Miami.
SO if you take your intelligence and create a new gene, are you God?
... my belief in that matter doesn't matter (and is too convoluted for this message :), I am worrying about -us- trying to behave like we are supreme beings.
The point was that this -interferes- with natural evolution.
If an artificially introduced gene grows in the intended plant, then yes it is very much like Creation (though generally speaking most artificial genes are taken from existing genes that occur in other organisms).
If that gene then populates throughout an ecosystem, causing that population to push out the previous population that didn't have the new gene, then it shows survival of the fittest. While ther gene wasn't naturally created through mutation, all following aspects follow the laws of Evolution.
Your comparison actually illustrates quite well the reason I have a problem with this. Man is trying to play God without having the omniscience to know what the affects will be. Just like introducing Kudzu from Japan in the U.S. (or any other example of organisms into areas that they did not belong), only now we're not doing it with complete organisms, we are instead creating new ones.
I'm not positing the existence of God
It is this problem that will eventually cause the downfall of the GM licensing rules as they exist right now (note: I'm not saying it will kill GM as a method or product).
;)
... this exactly what anti-GM folks have been saying for years ... once a new gene gets into the wild and it provides benefits, it will naturally propogate. It is called Evolution (except in Kansas and Georgia ... and I get to make that joke since I grew up in one and lived in the other for awhile) and we are most definitely tampering with it.
Take for instance recent studies that show that grain that was grown in the U.S. and exported to Mexico for -food- and not in the form of meant-for-planting-seeds has mixed in with the Mexican corn crops.
The Mexicans did not plant the GM seeds, they don't -want- GM seeds, but now they have them. By some interpretations of the current rules it means that the Mexican farmers (if they were in the states) would be unable to replant their existing crops nor sell the seeds elsewhere because they contain protected IP.
Ridiculous. Talk about viral licensing
The end result is that there is a law on it's way from Mexico stating that any corn imported from the U.S. has to be labelled GM (or GM free, which is rapidly becoming impossible) -and- milled before entry into Mexico. Even then Murphy states that some kernels will make it through the process whole and/or migrate naturally and the GM genes will continue to migrate.
Yep